Ex-Con Hovind released from the pokey.

[brinny]

Want me to Google this for you?

Do you know where it is?

No need to google for me. I know where it is. Would you like me to tell you?

Thank you kindly.

 

[Loudmouth]

see above. Real challenges have conditions and adult standards to meet that are agreed beforehand. From that retort its quite obvious you are more into proposing a child's game of "You get to name a name and I get to be the judge". which of course an an adult standard is just.....ummmm....... hilarious nonsense - not a challenge.

You can't even come up with a single name of an honest creationist?

 

[MikeEnders]

Rich. Challenges tenets of challenge. Won't accept challenge. You'd better get back to work.

Nope...I asked for the conditions of the challenge and your inability to come up with one pretty much proved my point....You don't have any which means its a farce and not a challenge at all. Its like someone proposing a contest and someone asks okay what are the rules and they say...forget about that I will tell you at the end whether I won or you did.

the only intelligent response to that would be.......ROFL

 

[Loudmouth]

Nope...I asked for the conditions of the challenge and your inability to come up with one pretty much proved my point....You don't have any which means its a farce and not a challenge at all. Its like someone proposing a contest and someone asks okay what are the rules and they say...forget about that I will tell you at the end whether I won or you did.

the only intelligent response to that would be.......ROFL

Give us a name of a creationist who you think gives an honest scientific argument for creationism.

 

[brinny]

Nope...I asked for the conditions of the challenge and your inability to come up with one pretty much proved my point....You don't have any which means its a farce and not a challenge at all. Its like someone proposing a contest and someone asks okay what are the rules and they say...forget about that I will tell you at the end whether I won or you did.

the only intelligent response to that would be.......ROFL

 

[bhsmte]

you don't know?

Thank you kindly.

Yes, I do know when it was discovered.

You were doing your own investigation though right?

 

[MikeEnders]

You can't even come up with a single name of an honest creationist?

I can come up with plenty but as any one can see you are hedging giving any conditions and rules of the challenge so you can CLAIM they are not honest. You might not know this but adults can see through you there.Sorry

 

[MikeEnders]

Give us a name of a creationist who you think gives an honest scientific argument for creationism.

Since you claimed there was a real challenge that no oen answered give me the conditions of the challenge that we both can agree on. You do know what a challenge is right? LOl...you are doing fine job of demonstrating how bogus this challenge you claim no one met was.

 

[brinny]

Yes, I do know when it was discovered.

You were doing your own investigation though right?

Yes. Would you like me to tell you the answer?

Thank you kindly.

 

[bhsmte]

Yes. Would you like me to tell you the answer?

Thank you kindly.

Did I ask for the answer?

This was something you could investigate on your own, correct?

 

[brinny]

Did I ask for the answer?

This was something you could investigate on your own, correct?

And i have done so, although i have a ways to go.

What i'm curious about now are if there are any "flaws" or have ever been flaws with "carbon dating".

Thank you kindly.

 

[bhsmte]

And i have done so, although i have a ways to go.

What i'm curious about now are if there are any "flaws" or have ever been flaws with "carbon dating".

Thank you kindly.

Keep reading.

Of course, if you go to creationist sources, good luck learning the real science behind the same.

 

[brinny]

Keep reading.

Of course, if you go to creationist sources, good luck learning the real science behind the same.

What sources do you recommend that are truly neutral?

Thank you kindly.

 

[bhsmte]

What sources do you recommend that are truly neutral?

Thank you kindly.

I assume you are interested in the science that supports the dating method, correct?

 

[brinny]

brinny said:
What sources do you recommend that are truly neutral?

Thank you kindly.

I assume you are interested in the science that supports the dating method, correct?

Is there science that doesn't?

Thank you kindly.

 

[JasonClark]

Actually it's the scientists claims that i'm needing more information on. Perhaps a scientist can skillfully articulate what it is they were trying to convey.

You stick with Kent he will explain everything so you will understand it, and don't let anyone tell you that he doesn't know exactly what he's doing because he does.

 

[bhsmte]

Is there science that doesn't?

Thank you kindly.

If there was, the dating method wouldn't be considered as reliable as it is.

 

[HitchSlap]

Do you know where it is?

No need to google for me. I know where it is. Would you like me to tell you?

Thank you kindly.

What's your point? You think god is soprano or alto?

 

[brinny]

If there was, the dating method wouldn't be considered as reliable as it is.

then why did you ask this:

bhsmte said:
I assume you are interested in the science that supports the dating method, correct?

 

[bhsmte]

You stick with Kent he will explain everything so you will understand it.

Good point.

If the poster really likes what Kenny has to say, because it jives with their faith, reading real scientific sources on the same will likely cause a bit of cognitive dissonance and that is never pleasant.